This is really going to put a premium on BIG short yardage runners. Big FBs.

A smart coach would put Raji back there at RB for 2 pt conversions... Or Sitton? If they know you are going to run. You got to be able to bring the beef!!!

Who are we kidding?!?! McCarthy will be the only coach in the league kicking for 1. Pulling a Carrol with the best RB in the league on the sideline....

Click to expand...

It will be interested to see if coaches will go for two points more often. Teams have successfully kicked a field goal on 95.2% of the attempts from 30-35 yards last season while only scoring on 48.3% of the two point conversions. With the rule change the expected points value is now higher going for it at 0.966 on two point conversions comprared to kicking the extra point.

It will be interested to see if coaches will go for two points more often. Teams have successfully kicked a field goal on 95.2% of the attempts from 30-35 yards last season while only scoring on 48.3% of the two point conversions. With the rule change the expected points value is now higher going for it at 0.966 on two point conversions comparred to kicking the extra point.

Click to expand...

Initially, I would expect a 1.4% edge in going for 2 will alter league strategy only at the margins...a team who's kicker is in a slump or a game with high cross winds.

As an FYI, Crosby's career FG make % from 32 and 33 yards is 90.5% on 19 of 21, though I wouldn't make too much out of that. It's a fairly small sample; one fewer miss over 8 years puts him 95.2%, in line with the league average for this average kicker.

If we look at the history of rule changes intended to minimize the importance of FGs by putting more of a penalty into misses, it took decades before teams changed their approaches.

In 1974, the goal posts were moved from the goal line to the end line, and missed FGs outside the 20 were placed at the line of scrimmage on the change of possession. In 1994, the rule was changed to place the ball at the spot of the kick on change of possession outside the 20.

Throughout this period, FG importance was not diminished. The significant improvement in place kicking state-of-the-art overwhelmed the rule changes.

It's only been in recent years that going for it on 4th. and short at the opponent's 35, for example, has been recognized as having the statistical edge, and is now fairly common in a variety of game situations.

The league will likely give the new rules a few years to evaluate the affect. I would expect they'll tweek them again in a few years.

Philly, I believe it was, proposed the 2 point attempt be placed at the 1 yard line. That would be a lot more interesting. Eliminating the PAT kick altogether would be even more interesting, but incremental changes are the way of the world in the NFL.

The league implemented the rule change for this season only. The owners will have to vote on it again next offseason.

Click to expand...

That's peculiar. It would seem to indicate there was considerable hesitancy among enough teams to force a re-debate after one year.

On the the other hand, there's some urgency in doing something since they're throwing the rule change directly into the regular season without a pre-season trial. Perhaps they figured preseason would not be a meaningful test since close game strategy takes a back seat to evaluating talent.

I like the rule change. Anything that makes the kicking game less important is good, imo. Kicking is tolerated only because kickers are built more like ordinary people, which gives all of our soccer grandkids hope of being a professional football player.

I love football. And would like it safe behind bullet proof glass, sealed in a vacuum, so as never to change for EVER!!! Dang it! Every time the rules change, the record book might as well be burned. We arent even playing the same game as back in the 50's... But I digress.

Im an advocate for going for 2. It's called growing a set, and believing in yourself. Once you decided you aren't going to settle for half, you can build a 2 point team. Figure out if Daniels or Raji can run the ball. Or maybe put in Barclay as 6th O-lineman, Richard Rodgers in at TE, and a couple FBs in wishbone. Raji 6 yards back.... Im just saying... With a full sack, and some strategimifacation. We could cash in on another 10% points from our scores...

• I also like the play being live - if the offense can score after a mishandled snap on a PAT, why can't the D?
• I didn't see a prohibition against going for two with the ball on the 15 yard line - I wonder which HC will be the first to try that surprise.
• I also think it's odd they're just trying this for a season.

I assume this change is made to make the 2pt conversion more viable? Or is there a much larger picture? Consider the scales of justice... Traditionally the run was the foundation. Now days the pass is taking over... Is this minute rule the feather that tips the scale back in favor of the run????

Most great passing teams cant run the ball. they are built for passing. 10milly WRs instead of 10milly RBs on the roster... So there could be a disadvantage for those teams to go for the 2pts..... Where as the teams who are still built for the power run, and average 5+yds a run as a team... They will most likely get that 2 pts more often...

This move strategically baits teams into building that run game back into their offense. Or suffer a disadvantage IMO.

I'm just angry that this cuts down on the amount of time that I have to run to the bathroom, hit the beer fridge, and get back to my couch in time for the kickoff. I better start getting into shape and timing myself.

The NFL is a multi-billion dollar industry. There is really no over thinking unless you consider we're just fans on a Packer forum. Then yeah, that probably is over thinking

Click to expand...

Im just being realistic about the ripple effect a change like this has on the entire game of football. Its tipped the scale where 2 pt conversions will IMO be the norm within a hand full of years. That changes everything!!! Including how the record books go from here on out. kickers wont he highest scorers anymore I bet. RBs value goes up?

That one point is a lot when the Pats are marking 8's and we are marking 7's. Aggressive teams like Belechek and the Pats will have a distinct advantage against conservative teams like McCarthy and the Packers. And Seattle with Wilson and Lynch. They will figure a way to clean up on this. We will be chasing.

Im just being realistic about the ripple effect a change like this has on the entire game of football. Its tipped the scale where 2 pt conversions will IMO be the norm within a hand full of years. That changes everything!!! Including how the record books go from here on out. kickers wont he highest scorers anymore I bet. RBs value goes up?

That one point is a lot when the Pats are marking 8's and we are marking 7's. Aggressive teams like Belechek and the Pats will have a distinct advantage against conservative teams like McCarthy and the Packers. And Seattle with Wilson and Lynch. They will figure a way to clean up on this. We will be chasing.

Click to expand...

Another poster thinking MM is conservative overall. Probably based on simply one game.